[Legatus]

I just read this at rorate and it’s left my head spinning. If they pull this off it’ll be a disaster.

[CWW]

The Church is not going to change its doctrine on marriage, divorce and the sacraments. There is so much disinformation out there by the liberals who have always a attacked the Church.

[longfellowsmuse]

The Catholic Church in many places is doing an abysmal job of teaching its youth the tenants of the faith.

How many of these divorced and remarried couples really believe that the holy eucharist is the actual body and blood of Christ. My hunch is that the desire to consume our Lord for some of these couples comes more from defiance and rebellion( remind you of anyone) than from a true desire to be unified with Christ.

The other question I would have for these priests would be how do you feel about permitting those in a state of grave sin to consume the body of Christ? Are you complicit in endangering their souls?

[sitetest]

As long as second marriages will be “tolerated but not accepted,” and the parties to such adulterous unions will be admitted to the Eucharist, can my mistress be “tolerated but not accepted,” and I can keep going to communion?

Now, all I need is a mistress...

[WriteOn]

First let me say that I have only been married once and still am to the same woman. Then let me say that the internal forum solution works without the brother-sister solution, for the same reason annulments work. Annulments are merely the recognition of a fact. The fact exists before the annulment.

[marshmallow]

The past 12 months have been surreal. A papal resignation, two popes (one "emeritus" and retired), a steady stream of invective against traditionalists ("self-absorbed, Promethean neo-Pelagians", "Rosary counter") and some strange homilies about the meaning of certain Gospel passages. Holy Communion for the divorced and remarried would be a game changer and would undermine everything the Church has taught about marriage, adultery and the Blessed Sacrament. As a result, there would certainly be major fallout, perhaps even open schism in the Church.

The Pope spoke the other day about "casuistry" in relation to the Pharisees' question to Jesus about whether it was lawful for a man to divorce his wife. Seeing as the subject was divorce and considering the timing with respect to the Synod, this would have been a perfect opportunity to address the whole question of divorce but the Pope was either unable or unwilling to give the entire teaching of Jesus on this matter.

He chose, instead, to concentrate on Christ's Bridegroom relationship to His Bride the Church and once again delivered a lecture about the evils of practicing modern day "casuistry" against those whose love has "failed". He warned us not to "condemn". Presumably, that was why he could not bring himself to utter the words ....."Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery", since that could possibly be considered as "condemnation". If that isn't relevant to the Synod, what is?

It's clear that these are moments of great historical importance through which we are living.